The role of the opposition and the abandonment of Republican policy cohesiveness.

Over the weekend, the Senate passed the $1.9 trillion Covid relief plan and now the bill has only a brief visit back to the House before landing on President Biden’s desk. The bill will be the Biden administration and their allies in Congress’ first major piece of legislation landing only seven weeks into his administration. The American Rescue Plan (ARP)  is the most expensive piece of legislation in American history. And, while it won’t contain a much sought after minimum wage increase, it does include a generous child tax credit, $1,400 checks to most Americans, expanded unemployment payments until the end of Summer, aid to flounders states and local governments, money for struggling farmers, financial support for public and private transportation, grants for bars, restaurants, and live venues, funding for K-12 education, and millions more in aid to combat coronavirus. By some estimates, the bill will cut American poverty levels by as much as a third.

The bill is set to be a major early accomplishment for the Biden administration which has been clear that they will be loud and proud about that accomplishment. They have every reason to be. While the ARP has been approved on purely partisan lines, not a single Republican lawmaker voted for it, its actual popularity seems to be shockingly bipartisan. Various polls have constantly placed the ARP as above 60% favorability with some polls reaching into the upper 70s.

Which makes for a political gamble if you are a Republican Senator or Representative. It wouldn’t be the first time Republicans gambled on the popularity of a bill with the belief they can change minds after it’s passage. The Obama Stimulus bill was popular at time of passage but by the 2010 midterms had been successfully undermined by Republican messaging. Likewise, the Trump tax cut was deeply unpopular at passage but became slightly less unpopular over time. 

Republicans, at least outwardly, appear to be taking a similar approach with this bill. Let it pass but reframe the bill after the fact. However, while the stimulus was fiercely attacked in 2009 and the Tax cuts were stalwartly defended by Republican lawmakers in 2017, the current debate over the ARP seems lackadaisical.

Republicans seem more interested in fighting culture wars and stoking grievance than engaging in the actual policy they have some control over. The Conservative Political Action Committee held its annual conference at the start of March but it focused on ‘cancel culture’ and the fear of conservative erasure more than what was actually happening in the halls of Congress. Fox News has been drawn to faux controversies about the estate of Dr. Seuss deciding to pull several books over racist caricatures and the Mr. Potato Head toy franchise rebranding to just be Potato Head, than making arguments against the massive legislation. 

Why aren’t Republicans making policy critiques of the largest bill in American legislative history? Part of the calculation may be that the bill is so popular now that they’d be better off fighting the narrative after it has passed. But their dereliction of legislative duty is especially damning for a party nominally committed to conservative ideals. Yes, not a single Republican voted for the bill. But why are Republicans not mounting serious policy reasons for doing so? 

Some of the meager efforts to engage with the substance of the policy have been to point out which sorts of unsavory people will receive the $1400 checks. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) went to twitter to condemn the bill for giving money to incarcerated people. Others have argued that the bill isn’t targeted enough towards Covid relief. Neither are necessarily spurious complaints but they seem to be falling on deaf ears. Americans want to see this bill passed and Republicans are mostly unwilling to mount a strong defense for why they won’t vote for it.

Republican’s efforts to block the legislation coupled with their inability to raise a unified opposition to the bill bring up  an interesting question for the party and broader questions for democratic systems. Who does the Republican party see themselves representing and what do they think those voters want? The answer is clearly mixed. While there have been efforts to recast the party as the ‘people’s party’ or the ‘party of the working man’ the reality is that the Republican party still represents large commercial interests to a greater degree than the democratic party does. This leads to the policy making we have seen in the last few weeks: oppose a popular bill that has serious tangible goods for working-class, rural, and poor Americans while stoking cultural fears. 

The GOP is betting that they can continue to have their cake and eat it too. They have come to understand how strongly social issues drive their voters after the election of Donald Trump and they are willing to play into those concerns, real or imagined, as heavy-handedly as possible while shying away from serious economic policy in the hopes they can maintain their unpopular conservative fiscal stance. It’s an interesting bet. It may just work. 

Trump certainly campaigned far closer to the center on economic ideas in his run for the presidency in 2016, all while driving hard on conservative cultural grievance. However, Republican lawmakers were able to mostly keep him from actually legislating towards the center all while he continued to spark cultural fires. This seemingly didn’t hurt his popularity with Republican voters who were fine with his lack of moderate fiscal policy as long as he continued to 'own the libs' and distribute red meat. 

The GOP in opposition is playing their hand, hoping that their voters won’t stray to a Democratic party which is passing popular legislation. In most other democracies this would carry a deep risk, but in America’s deeply polarized system it may just work. If it doesn’t, it may just be the catalyst which forces the GOP to change its platform to attract more voters. If it does, American democracy continues down the path of partisan identities and sectarianism: where politics is discursive combat and policy happens regardless of support.